My Christmas present to myself. This beauty has just returned from a visit to Dr. Cosineau (Timemachines) where it received ' the works' treatment. Triangle date stamp with arrow indicates a 1927 Lone Eagle. I believe that both movement and case serial numbers fall within the 5000 range for the first issue. The new crown jewel of my collection! Nary a mark on the pristine case, new hand cut crystal and a wonderful new period strap and buckle.

The Dr. does do really nice work and if you hadn't lit up the lume, your right, no would have known. Im amazed he even had a spare set of hands, I certainly don't. For what it's worth, you seldom will ever need to see it glowing anyway.

Movement: 1926 Lone Eagle (from my research over the past 7+ years, this serial number and movement indentifiers make it part of the what I consider a movement grouping used in the original 1927 5000 release).

Dial: Whilst it does appear to have some issues with the edging, it is of the correct period and has the correct dial numbering and layout. We cannot say for certain what happened to the dial, if the original was damaged or if it is a donar dial from another watch.

Hands: Incorrect for the origainl 5000 series which had spade style hands, but the later cathederal do not change the overall ID of this watch. The second hand may be a 10AN NOS replacement and as such is correct for this model. I have used NOS 10AN second hands before and they tend to be longer so they can be cut down to the required size of various 10AN movement/dial combinations.

Over all there is nothing here under the terms we gave established that put this watch in the "Non-Conforming" category.

Yes the establishment of a group of 5000 (based on Bulova's historic account) has no factural evidence, but for now it is the best we have in establishing a baseline. Whilst the other number of 30,000 that has also been mentioned also relates to the Lone Eagle model it does not relate to actual manufactured watches, just 'sales' orders.

Yes the 5000 is a myth, but it's a myth based on actual publised information from the company themselves and from my research over the past 7+ years, that all the serial numbers that I have encountered for this particular series so far fall within a grouping less than 5000 (that just means we do not have a large enough sample as yet to determine the start and end points). But for now until proved otherwise it's the best theory/myth (whatever you want to call it) we have.

Watches that I consider part of the 5000 grouping that I have encountered over the past 7+ years all have the same movement indicators, suggesting they were manufactured from the same batch. There is one particular marker on these movements that is not seen on any other movment. The following lists all the LEs by the movement serial number and as you can see they fit within a range of 5000 thus far.

Year

Movement

Mov Serial

Case Serial

Jewels

26

10AN

225751

??

17

26

10AN

226044

6636667

17

26

10AN

226840

6634587

17

26

10AN

226934

6635298

17

26

10AN

226975

6636219

17

26

10AN

227328

6637785

17

26

10AN

227399

6560017

17

26

10AN

227733

6637411

17

26

10AN

227844

6635469

17

26

10AN

227962

6635638

17

26

10AN

228227

6636409

17

26

10AN

228259

6636586

17

Now if a number of movement serial numbers were outside the 5000 range I would agree that a single batch of 5000 might be incorrect, but as you can clearly see, so far the idea certainly holds up to the notion of Bulova producing a batch of 5000 movements specially for the release of the original Lone Eagle.

If anyone can show me an 'all original' movement with a serial number inside the numbers above that don't have the corresponding matching components then I will happily bow down and agree that the notion of a 5000 batch is incorrect.

Back to the subject watch. The dial in this watch does not make it non-conforming. It is, regardless of the dial a 1927 Lone Eagle.

Regarding the dial, yes it has been replaced. It was supplied by Shawn Bourg ( thank you sir) and expertly fitted by Mike Cousineau. What some of you have noticed in the close up photos is distortion caused by the edge of the new crystal Mike cut to fit. I hadn't really paid it much mind but after posting the watch I did notice it in the photos. Viewing the two side angle photos should reveal that the dial is the correct size and shape for this watch.

My thanks to all who left kind remarks. I am very excited to have this one done.

Yes, I supplied Geoff with the dial and I will guarantee it was not fitted crudley but precision fitted in my own LE case before I shipped it.

Bobbee, I take offence to your comments about the dial. Pictures don't always tell a thousand words. Critsize that dial as crude and you insult me and my work directly. I Sir am not some hack jobber without skills. Geoff knows this or he would never have used it.

One day someone else may require my help, comments like that may influence my decisions in the future.

I have proved the Bulova "history" or "timeline" contains a mish-mash of reality and false claims.

I have posted these findings both here and several other sites, and they contain proof of wrong dates/claims for many things other than the above. Such as the date Coolidge presented Bucky Harris with a watch, their claim of inventing the first electric clock, the first clock/radio, the first line of men's wrist watches etc. The list goes on.

The removal of several "Bulova historical facts" includes the "first 5,000", as mentioned above. That alone speaks volumes.

In sorry Rob but in reality you have proven nothing. These are just your personal opinions and they should be noted as such. Timelines are like Chinese Whispers, I'm sure they get muddled here and there over time, but there is usually always and resemblence of truth. I cannot understand why you have made it you're mission in life to publically bash so much of Bulova's history. For what purpose? If a date was wrong, so what. If the number is wrong, so what. It still tells a story, a story that in some form or another is based on an actual event and for all we know is 100% as Bulova have stated.

I don't know why it took me several years to think of this, but I'm going to change all my tick votes to Two Ticks Tentative for these First Five Thousand Lone Eagles. We certainly don't have concrete evidence to warrant a Three Tick Confirmed. I had been giving three ticks confirmed, when that's not true.

This way we can keep the watches ID'ed as Lone Eagles. We can keep the little 5,000 club logo. We can keep digging and researching the history and theory/story/myth/ledgend. We certainly have amassed a lot of info on this watch during this time period by debating the theory.

Bobbee, and any other panel members who chose to, can certainly vote One Tick Not Confirmed if they wish. It's not only tentative, but it's not confirmed too LOL.

Two Ticks from me :)

Edit: ...and regardless of when they were first sold, the year of manufacture for both the case and movements is 1926.